Democrats Ready To Deal On Gun Control?

Barring a dramatic turnaround, the Democrats now face a choice of either walking away from any expanded background check or accepting one without paper records of private sales.

  • Share
  • Read Later
Craig F. Walker / The Denver Post

President Barack Obama addresses the crowd during a forum at the Denver Police Academy in Denver on April 03, 2013.

President Obama and the advocates for increased federal gun control are coming to the end of their big Easter recess effort to build support for a tougher background check bill, and the results don’t look promising. Obama returned Thursday from a Western trip that included a stop in Colorado, where he reminded listeners of the Aurora and Columbine killings. Obama applauded Colorado’s recent gun control legislation, which he said showed “that practical progress is possible by enacting tougher background checks that won’t infringe on the rights of responsible gun owners.” On Monday, he heads to Connecticut where he will make his closing arguments.

But Democratic sources tell TIME that the tough background check bill that emerged from the Judiciary Committee March 12, doesn’t appear to have the votes to overcome a filibuster when it comes to the Senate floor in the next week or two, let alone get through the Republican controlled House. The push by Obama and his allies, including a $12 million ad buy by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, appears only to have highlighted the fact that any bill that includes paper records for all private sales can’t pass Congress.

Perhaps the greatest sign that the push for tougher legislation has failed is that Democrats are quietly preparing a fall back position. Behind the scenes staffers for Republican Senator Tom Coburn and Democrat Charles Schumer are drafting a substitute background check bill that would be softer, but could get broad Republican support. “Lines of communication remain open and both sides are working in good faith to come to an agreement,” says one source close to the deal.

The substitute bill is not yet done—the sticking point remains whether there will be a requirement for paper records of background checks on private sales at gun shows or elsewhere. Coburn says Republicans won’t accept any expansion of record keeping to private sales, even though paper records are required for guns sold by licensed dealers. Gun control advocates say that not including a paper record of a private gun sale makes the expanded background check requirement for gun shows and other private sales toothless. The bill incorporates other compromises already agreed to, like exempting holders of concealed-carry permits and intra-family gun transfers from the checks, and other measures.

Barring a dramatic turnaround, the Democrats now face a choice of either walking away from any expanded background check or accepting one without paper records of private sales. Some gun control groups are pushing Democrats to walk away. But the White House appears to be softening its tone. “What the president wants to sign is the strongest gun bill he can sign,” White House senior advisor Dan Pfeiffer said Thursday at a function of the website, Politico. “What we have to make sure is that whatever we do is better than current law,” Pfeiffer said.

It’s not surprising the President is in a mood to deal. Not only has he not built support for the tougher bill favored by Democrats. Now the NRA is pushing against even the modest measures that previously were a lock, including an expansion of penalties for gun trafficking. Earlier this week, the NRA circulated language that would gut that part of the gun control package. At this point, Obama and Schumer look ready to take the best deal they can get, which seems to be the one Tom Coburn is offering.

462 comments
collioure
collioure

Apparently Sens Toomey (R, Pa) and Manchin (D, WVa) have developed a compromise on extending background checks. If I understood that those illegally seeking to purchase a gun would be prosecuted, I could support this compromise. Currently very few are prosecuted.

Sticky_Wicky
Sticky_Wicky

Bang, Bang! When will the gun control debate finally be resolved? Check out this comic on the gun issue http://theunisourcegroup.com/bang-bang-3. For more news and opinion visit the Voices in the Dark weekly comic strip and follow @Sticky_Wicky on Twitter.

doyen73
doyen73

In 1994 the Brady Bill was introduced and so rankled the GOP base that they were able regain political power in congress. At the same time Pres Clinton introduced a measure that would have increase the police force by 100K ref "Out of Range" by Mark Tushnet pg xvii. The unintended consequences of the gun control lobby "win" was the police measure was defeated which probably did more damage then the Brady Bill prevented. If we keep chasing these arbitrary restrictions like background checks which are being enforced at the state level anyway and ignore the real issues we will be back where we started in a couple years. If we pass this "increase" background check measure we might pacify the masses thus reducing the political press. I want to see real progress in reducing violence like better communication between the medical community, police and judicial system. That alone would have prevented Aurora Colorado especially since the suspects psychiatrist called the police who were impotent to do something ref http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/human_nature/2013/04/aurora_theater_shooting_documents_james_holmes_psychiatrist_warned_university.html.

ChrisDoherty
ChrisDoherty

So, why in the World has no one suggested a registry system for those who cannot purchase firearms, every person not allowed to purchase firearms should be on this list with their social security number. When people want to sell a firearm then they call the registry system and input the info and if they are flagged then there not allowed to sell to that person. why does law abiding citizens have to be on a registry if the plan is not to confiscate? The Constitution does not limit my religion, it does not limit my free speech, and it does not limit my guns that I own/want. 

What you people are calling assault weapons, are not assault weapons in the hands of law abiding citizens. any weapon including a large rock in the hands of a criminal is an assault weapon. Ask any law enforcement officer. What if the police are 2 hours away from being able to reach me and a group of people heavily armed comes at me. If I don't have enough firepower to protect myself then I'm a sitting duck. If I do choose to have what you call assault weapons, then I just might stand a chance. The police are there to clean up the mess and I should be allowed to have anything that they would have to protect themselves "your so called assault weapons". 

paulejb
paulejb

Democrats: We'll let you keep your guns as long as we can still steal your money.

JKK9852
JKK9852

I’ve been wondering why the big push for universal NICS checks on firearm purchases since this would not prevent most firearms crime or even the recent high-profile shootings. Once enacted as a federal statute, this is next:

·Shift the burden of proof of eligibility from the FBI to the applicant.

The NICS check is a virtual permit to purchase a firearm. Currently the FBI must prove ineligibility. Shift the burden to the applicant to prove eligibility. This could require the submittal of a clean police record, clean bill of mental health, proof of age and residency, certificate of completion of a safety course, references from family and employers, etc. Only then would an actual permit be issued to the applicant. This permit would be necessary to purchase and own a firearm.

·Expand restrictions and disqualifications.

Currently felony convictions and adjudicated mental incompetency are the primary reasons for denying a permit. Most any restriction can be enacted short of complete prohibition. Some possibilities: Any criminal conviction. Any recorded report of aberrant behavior. A bad or nonexistent credit report. Listed as a dependent for tax purposes.

Be creative and use your imagination. The authoritarian liberals will.

DanPind
DanPind

Just got back from Winnipeg Canada.  They have a lot of stabbings and the only ones with guns are the criminals. 

Two men were killed in a shooting at a daycare in Gatineau, Canada's capital region, on Friday morning, while all 53 children were safely evacuated by the daycare staff members, police said.

A gunman fired shots in a crowded food court in one of Canada's busiest malls Saturday killing a man and injuring seven others, police said.

To all the libtards who happily give up their right to protect themselves that's great.  Darwin theorized that you won't last long.  For the rest of those who don't want to get stabbed or shot by a criminal because we're waiting on a cop to show up, get out of our way and move to Canada. 

telecomdonnie
telecomdonnie

@mantisdragon91 Really??? Maybe you should check your own spelling before to criticize others...

nra45acp
nra45acp

Expanding background checks is a no-brainer. However, until the states input the data required to make background checks effective the system will not do a  better job of catching the kinds of people who commit mass shootings. The people who attempt to purchase a firearm that do not qualify to own one are not being prosecuted as well. People should be questioning this practice vigorously; unenforced laws are no deterrent to the criminally inclined.  

telecomdonnie
telecomdonnie

All the libtards are butt hurt because their president could not secure a weapons ban/confiscation....

hereandback
hereandback

A little here, a little there. In 20 years the right wing will say wtf happened? It isn't about the battle. It is about the war. People's opinions are changing and over time, gun ownership will be better regulated.

EddieVonMises
EddieVonMises

Go join a well-regulated militia if you want to play with guns, like the Constitution says.

doyen73
doyen73

Sorry one correction, the 100K police measure was passed but congress didn't fund it, essentially defeating the measure.

aztecian
aztecian

@ChrisDohertyif you live 2 hours from civilization, you must be in the wilderness.  you shouldn't be living in a wildlife preserve (are you native indian, subsistence existence?).  i suppose you're protecting yourself from sasquatch?  ridiculous republican mentality. 

mantisdragon91
mantisdragon91

@ChrisDoherty So out of curiosity should there be laws in effect to require you to report when your gun is stolen? My home city of Philadelphia has been fighting against the NRA for years who keeps suing them every time they want to impose this requirement. Please tell me which of your constitutional rights would be infringed upon if you a re required to report if your gun is stolen?

collioure
collioure

@ChrisDoherty 

Isn't that the instant check system we have?  Only the registries of those who are not allowed to buy guns are not well-maintained and do not include the deranged young men who commit these mass murders, and the feds do not prosecute those who unlawfully try to buy a gun.

aztecian
aztecian

@ChrisDohertythis is so typical of your type.  you try to oversimplify the problem.  your hair-brained idea would never work...your argument is ridiculous.  let's only require driver's licenses for those who speed, everyone else can just drive unregistered.   it is easier to register all guns and keep track of their owners as opposed to trying to register only a few.  

your second point is equally ridiculous.   what do you need an ar15 for?  do you feel you will someday be attacked by zombies? 

paulejb
paulejb

@JKK9852 

They'll be a mad dash by Chicago gangbangers to register their firearms with the man. Not!

mantisdragon91
mantisdragon91

@DanPind You actually make some valid points, but its hard to take anyone running around screaming "Libtard" seriously. If both sides actually had real dialogue instead of slinging around insults maybe we could actually better understand each other and come to a solution everyone except the extreme fringe on both sides could agree upon.

aztecian
aztecian

@DanPind that's it?  try making a comparison to one city in the u.s.?  and where do you think the criminals got their guns from?  this is something your nra friends won't discuss because they just want to increase gun sales.  it's all about selling as many guns as possible.  they want to see places like chicago in dire poverty and crime.  they make money selling guns, not building communities.

mantisdragon91
mantisdragon91

@telecomdonnie And maybe you should consider your posts and how they reflect on you. Being in telecom myself, I would never hire anyone who runs around screaming libtard or butthurt.

aztecian
aztecian

@telecomdonnie repulitard...you will live to see it...and sooner than you think.  the majority has spoken, and the majority is not the confederate states.  say goodbye to ar15s and missile launchers.

DanPind
DanPind

@hereandback That's right!  You tell um lib.  We all need better regulation in all aspects of our lives.  Since most libs have difficulty thinking for themselves, they need big government to think for them.   I think big government should be able to control the amount of electricity you can purchase in a day.  I think big government should assign a government accountant to oversee all aspects of everyone's household budget.  I think big government should regulate  all the things we all say. We should only say positive things about our great leader and his big government...nothing negative.  This would be considered racist and socially unacceptable.  I think big government should regulate how we practice religion.  Regulation is a good thing.  It helps those with little mind to achieve greatness.

FortWorthBill
FortWorthBill

@EddieVonMises The Supreme Court disagrees with you!

In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment "codified a pre-existing right" and that it "protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home"

aztecian
aztecian

@EddieVonMises that would be the army, navy or marines.   for some reason, rednecks think this means a family gathering where everyone brings weapons of mass destruction (ar15s) to a picnic.  the rightwing-rethugs with their whiskey, bibles and guns believe they have the right obtain whatever weapons they please.  this is not the case...constitutional scholars have made it clear:  the right wing has distorted the 2nd amendment and applied false meaning to what is meant by "well regulated militia".  this is not 1776, and the british are not planning to invade the u.s.

ChrisDoherty
ChrisDoherty

@aztecian @ChrisDoherty That is the most stupid reply I have ever seen in my life. There are many places that people live in the "wilderness" that are not wildlife preserve. Yes I am native american, but that means absolutely nothing at all. many small towns in America live 2 or more hours away from the police. notice in my first comment I said "away from police" not away from civilization. many small towns rely on the sheriff, the small town I grew up in had one sheriff that covered three different towns approximately 45 minutes away from each other, so, if he were in the furthest town, he would be at the very least an hour and a half away. Thats not including having to drive through the towns. ridiculous democratic mentality.   

ChrisDoherty
ChrisDoherty

@mantisdragon91 @ChrisDoherty . Yes I do believe that we should have to report a lost or stolen firearm. We have laws that say we have to already, they need to enforce the laws that we have instead of adding more restrictions on law abiding citizens. I personally don't believe my rights would be infringed upon if this were to be enforced. 

ChrisDoherty
ChrisDoherty

@collioure @ChrisDoherty Very true collioure. they need to add the psychos and maintain the system and enforce the law to those who do unlawfully buy the illigal guns. 

ChrisDoherty
ChrisDoherty

@aztecian @ChrisDoherty , first of all I am not a type. OK so lets register the trillions and trillions of guns instead of only a few people that shouldn't get these guns, ya that's logic. The only reason to register firearms is so that the government will know where they are, so they can take them when they want. For your next point. There are no such things as zombies. For what reason does the police, or the military need an ar15, to protect themselves and the ones that are around them. not every armed criminal commits a crime alone. sometimes you have 5, 6, 10. I have no chance to protect my family or whoever may be with me if the police are hours away. Unless I am well armed militia. You say I don't need an ar15, well vehicle accidents claim the life of people more than guns do, and very rarely do you see a speed limit sign above 75 miles an hour, so maybe we should protect our country by making all cars go no faster than 75 because we don't NEED anything fast, it's scary and it kills so many innocent people. So maybe we don't need cars that go faster than he law allows. I'll guarantee that if you own a car, it goes faster than the speed limit. Maybe it should be banned. 

DanPind
DanPind

@aztecian @DanPind  that it?  Aztecian, you can give up your right to own a fire arm.  No one is stopping you.  Where do you think they got their guns?  Probably from the libtard fast and furious operation.  If there is a demand for guns then sure, meet the demand and sell them.  Guess who's creating the demand for guns in the U.S....the libtards.  Their talk of banning various kinds of guns has even some liberals running to the gun shop to purchase a good firearm.  Who wants Chicago in poverty???  They have a mayor who, through a legislative process, can correct everything in Chicago.  He's even a liberal!  Surely, a liberal can fix the Chicago violence problem.  Maybe Rahm will make it tougher for criminals to get guns.   

aztecian
aztecian

@mantisdragon91 @telecomdonnie he's probably from one of the redneck banjo states.  they're all tards married to their cousins.  they live for two or three things...god, guns and 4x4s.

DanPind
DanPind

You must be Canadian.  Go back home.

hereandback
hereandback

@DanPind @hereandback That's the difference between "us liberals" and you. We are willing to take care of those less fortunate than us. 

EddieVonMises
EddieVonMises

@michaelmihalyi@EddieVonMises 

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

The Second Amendment prioritizes a well-regulated militia and the security of a free state when introducing the right to keep and bear arms. It could say otherwise, but it doesn't.

DanPind
DanPind

Constitutional scholars???  They must be educated like you.  You don't have to own a gun.  You can give up that right.  Don't let anyone get in your way.  The pen is mightier than the sword!  Since heart disease kills more people in a year than all gun related crimes combined, you should also give up your fried food.  You should also not purchase sugary sodas over 12 oz and limit yourself to 1 a day.  You should also give up salt (this causes hypertension).  You should also give up your car and ride the bike (it's greener).  You should also stop buying fruit and vegetables out of season (this causes global warming due to fuel to transport).  You should also turn the power off to your house to lower your carbon foot print.  Lastly, you should shut the hell up and move to Canada.  You'll be much happier there. 

ChrisDoherty
ChrisDoherty

@aztecian @ChrisDoherty The majority has spoken as well as the Constitution!!!! The polls you read must be different from the polls I read, you must be reading liberal media sources that are paid by the Obama administration to hide the truth from the American people. Check out collioure any my conversation above. He states it very well. You can't put the "psycos" on a list because their not criminals, they have done nothing wrong. Also, they can't even enforce the gun laws that they have already. What makes you think IF they pass new laws, they would be able to enforce them either. It doesn't matter what laws you put into place, criminals will not ever obey the laws that they want to break. Murder is illegal, lets raise the punishment so they don't murder. Oh wait a minute, in the United States you can get life in prison or even the death penalty, does that stop them. If a criminal wants guns, high capacity magazines, or what you call assault weapons, they will get them no matter what laws are there. They will get what they want to do what they want no matter what laws are in place. Did you happen to know that guns are banned on school properties? Did that stop any school shootings ever? The answer to that question is, no. They don't obey the law and they never will. Look at Chicago, Illinois. they have some of the toughest gun laws in the country, they make it so difficult to own a firearm that it's not even worth trying as a law abiding citizen. They also have one of the highest crime rates by guns in the country. Look at Los Angeles, California, their sheriff basically will not sign off on a concealed carry permit. They have one of the highest murder rates by guns in the country.   Also, stop labeling me, it's very childish. I am not a type, I'm not from Texas, and "white indian cowboys"? Which is it? white or Indian? How about Native American? I am simply stating truth, comments that are logical or can be backed up by facts. I don't have a problem admitting when I am wrong or if someone states something that makes more logical sense about something I have said, I don't argue with them or call them names. I'm not closed minded and believe everything that my political party say's as if it were the gospel. Politicians lie. They all do and they always will lie to your face. I know my rights and I know the laws. I will never register my firearms, nor will I ever have to.  Learn to live with the second amendment of the Constitution of the United Stated of America because it will not go away and it shall not be infringed! On a final note, if you want childish name calling or racist comments, go elsewhere. I am finished with you unless you want a civil conversation.  

aztecian
aztecian

@ChrisDoherty @aztecian oh okay...you're one of those white indian cowboys from texas.  well, this ain't texas and the majority has spoken.  it is time to register your guns with the feds and eliminate assault rifles from the consumer market.  poll after poll show americans want change and not obstruction and weapons of mass destruction.

collioure
collioure

@ChrisDoherty @collioure 

But they can't add the "psychos."  They have rights too, and if they haven't committed any crimes . . ., the state cannot exclude them.

The USA is going to have to learn to live with the 2nd Amendment.

I'm still waiting for an explanation of why current gun laws are not enforced.

aztecian
aztecian

@DanPind @aztecian sorry..."gun walking" was started under the gw's reign of terror.  get your facts straight you ring-wing-nut.

DanPind
DanPind

@aztecian @DanPind Another libtard, like blaming everything on George Bush.  Even after spending 4 trillion of the next generation's money, O man hasn't been able to turn the economy around.  Didn't realize Eric Holder worked for Bush.  Thanks for correcting me.

aztecian
aztecian

@DanPind @aztecian oh yeah...typical rethug, like blaming the economy on obama, you blame fast and furious on the democrats when in fact that is another gw bush failure.

chicago is dangerous because the nra and gun manufacturers have pushing their of agenda for more and more guns to made and now our cities are overwhelmed with gun violence.  only one group is responsible for that.  the gee-O-pee. 

DanPind
DanPind

@aztecian @DanPind Never played.  Have 2 B.S degrees and in upper level management.  That's right.  Only libtards resort to attempting to belittle those by calling them rednecks.  At least you haven't played the libtard race card...yet.

aztecian
aztecian

@nra45acp @aztecian ok charles bronson with your bigman forty-five and your nra card, why don't you do something constructive instead of obstructive.